Pros:
The design here, given the layout of the available land, is fairly well thought out and uses what elevation is available. Tee shots are framed nicely for the most part and offer up a specific drive, but leave other more difficult options available.
The signs are nice and large and well designed, but they don't list distance!
Hole 5 offers a nice long ripper style hole, offering you the chance to air it out and test your manhood on a 460' hole - uphill at that!
Hole 9 is probably the best - plays uphill to a pin surrounded by quite a few pines just outside 30'. There are a few larger trees which frame out the need for a good S-style drive to get up to the pin.
Cons:
Despite decent design off the tees, all the greens are wide open and not risky placements at all. If some of the pins were tucked into the woods, or elevated, or placed on a slope, it would offer much more challenge.
Just one tee pad, and no material at all, so they are long eroded dirt piles. Two tees, not at different skill levels, but just two tees, would offer a chance to be like Pamperin (yeah, not much to aspire to) and play as an 18-holer at least.
There are no water hazards, but road OB comes into play.
No huge or drastic elevation changes.
No seclusion or heavily wooded play.
Basket #1 is busted up bad, leaving holes in the base were discs can drop through.
Other Thoughts:
Is this what we get, or is this what we settle for? I ponder this question often because I think disc golf enthusiasts want new courses so badly, that we will take any chunk of land that is offered to us and build an average or lackluster course. Another thought is that the general disc golfer population has brought this upon us - why would a parks department or regulating agency want us to build a great course on an amazing piece of land, when these same board members see so very much litter, vandalism, and disrespect at local city courses? UWGB falls into this category. The college has a TON of amazing property that would yield a 4-5 disc course if the proper designers were involved. But what the disc golfers got was the use of some generally boring and under-used property to install a course. This leads to too many lackluster holes and just a "Typical" style course. (Perkins park will undoubtedly be another typical "GB9er"). Given that this is just a 9 holer also, with only one tee per hole, the course is below average. I don't mind the course, but it's just one of those "blah" courses. My ratings have a lot of compression at 2.5 to 3.5, but the difference between the 1 and 2 disc courses is pretty wide.